Pornography has received much attention already. The main topics of interest in this area are: definitions of pornography and obscenity, demographic attributes affecting community or personal standards, attitudes regarding the unique issue of Internet pornography, the impact violence in pornography has on society, the feminist perspective to pornography, and individuality and privacy issues.
This country has had a difficult task attempting to arrive at a consensus regarding the definitions of pornography and obscenity, which have more unique connotations than the number of letters that make up the words (Jackson, 1997). Some are passive, simply posing the question of whether or not we must choose between freedom of speech and equality or safety (Strossen, 1996). These people question the constitutionality and capability of regulation (Easton and Graham, 1995). Others more aggressively attack pornography opposition as viewpoint discrimination (Rosenberg, 1993; Stark, 1998).
Several studies have been performed attempting to analyze demographic differences in how people feel about limiting pornography. As cited in Clark and Wiederman, Weis (1998) points out that the social scripts used by individuals to help organize life events are internalized and affected by demographic variables such as social class, ethnicity, and religious affiliation (p. 133). This indicates that demographic differences merit scrutiny.
Franks (1999) carried out a study in which he compared variation on measures of sociopolitical ideology and several demographic attributes with variation in the degree of acceptance of sexually explicit materials. He found that people who exhibited a high acceptance of sexually oriented materials were predominantly younger, more highly educated, and more liberal in their sociopolitical orientations than their less tolerant counterparts.
Two studies performed by Bogaert, Woodard, and Hafer (1999) examined the relation between intelligence and men's sexual attitudes and interpersonal behavior with a woman after viewing pornography. Intellectual level was examined as a demographic variable in an attempt to determine variance in how the viewing of pornography affects attitudes and reactions towards women in a social setting.
As far as pornography on the Internet is concerned, Americans do not seem to want the government to limit access to "cyber porn" in general, but do want children protected from sexually explicit material (Pollack, 1996). Advocates of online pornography cited four reasons for opposing an outright ban: such materials are protected by constitutional freedom of speech, no consensus exists about what constitutes pornography, the government cannot be trusted to censor wisely or well, and as a worldwide phenomenon, the World Wide Web is virtually impossible to control (Two Studies, 2000).
Another frequently investigated topic involves the impact of violent content in pornographic media and its affect on society. Barron and Kimmel (2000) conducted a study that measures the sexually violent content in magazine, video, and Usenet (Internet newsgroup) pornography. Specifically, the level of violence, the amount of consensual and nonconsensual violence, and the gender of both victim and victimizer were compared. A consistent increase in the amount of violence from one medium to the next was found.
The viewpoint that pornography should be limited in terms of free speech is typically a feminist perspective (Sileo, 1995). However, some believe that it has become a political issue, possibly playing a role in the platform of candidates up for election to offices that have authority to influence the decision regarding regulation of pornography (Childress, 1991).
Flag burning, on the other hand, has not garnered very much scrutiny in terms of studying the demographic differences involved when it comes to opinions regarding free speech. It would be useful to discover if peoples' opinions are affected by such differences, because, after all, the future of the ever-evolving social contract depends upon the opinions of the majority.
Gender is a marked variable in many issues facing United States citizens today, and almost every citizen fits into one of the two mutually exclusive categories of male or female, so it would interesting to discover if such a variable is noteworthy in the issue of flag burning.
Therefore, the following research question arises:
RQ1: Do people differ due to gender in their attitudes regarding how far free speech should be limited in terms of flag burning?
Along with differences in race inherently come differences in cultural and ethnic backgrounds, which seems to be an important variable in many issues, especially an issue that seeks to determine attitudinal differences toward a particular culture's symbol - the American flag.
This makes race an intriguing variable in the issue of flag burning, and raises the following research question:
RQ2: Do people differ due to race in their attitudes regarding how far free speech should be limited in terms of flag burning?
Because all of the branches of the United States military stress the elemental importance of loyalty to the country, it would be wise to make connection to the military a variable if only for the sake of controlling for it in statistical analysis.
Hence, the third research question exists:
RQ3: Do people differ due to military connection in their attitudes regarding how far free speech should be limited in terms of flag burning?
Since different religious affiliations are analogous to miniature cultures, or subcultures, and emphasize loyalty to country in varying degrees, an individual's religious connection, if any at all, is also an important variable to consider.
Consequently, the fourth research question emerges:
RQ4: Do people differ due to religious affiliation in their attitudes regarding how far free speech should be limited in terms of flag burning?
Methods
A questionnaire was distributed to a sample of 43 students on the Fayetteville campus of the University of *****. The students were members of two different sections of a basic communication course. The questionnaire was not pre-tested, but was analyzed several times by an expert. The sample was not random, but, rather, a convenience sample.
Before class began, an informed consent document was distributed and signed by those interested in taking part in the study. The documents were then collected before the questionnaire was distributed to ensure confidentiality. The survey was dispersed face down and the respondents were given instructions not to begin until they were provided with directions for completing the questionnaire. The respondents were given typical instructions along with the admonition not to go back to a page once it was completed.
The questionnaire consisted of demographic questions inquiring about gender, race, military connection and religious affiliation, and also included Likert-type questions and nominal level questions concerning attitudes about flag burning. Fifty-one percent of the respondents were male, and 49 percent were female. Eighty-eight percent were white, two percent were black, and nine percent were neither white nor black. Seventy-nine percent were Christian and 21 percent were non-Christian with 12 percent indicating no religion, 21 percent Baptist, 16 percent Methodist, nine percent Catholic, nine percent Church of Christ, 21 percent non-denominational, two percent other Christian, two percent Judaism, five percent Islam, and two percent other non-Christian. For statistical analysis purposes, respondents were grouped into two groups: Christian and non-Christian. Thirty percent indicated they were connected to the U.S. military, and 70 percent indicated no connection according to the question which asked: are you or your parent/guardian a member in or veteran of the U.S. military?
The questionnaire focused on attitudes toward burning the flag and attempted to discover if the respondent might ever consider doing anything to the flag that would be considered desecration, or ever consider burning the flag. Also, knowledge of proper disposal of soiled and worn flags was assessed along with attitudes towards why people might resort to burning the flag.
Principal component factor analysis using the Varimax rotation method with Kaiser Normalization was run to assess the dimensions embedded in the five flag burning questions. Two components emerged, with three questions loading together onto the first component, and two questions loading onto the second component. The researcher could not find a logical explanation for the loading, and thus, proceeded to run Cronbach’s alpha on the five questions to discover whether or not to eject any of the questions from the concept of flag burning.
Cronbach’s alpha for the five Likert-type questions dealing with the issue of flag burning was .79. This concept is referred to as attitudes toward flag burning. The questions were: “Please indicate your feelings regarding the following statement: ‘Burning the U.S. flag is an acceptable form of free speech,’” “Would the government be exercising its authority too carelessly if it banned burning the U.S. flag?” “Can you imagine any circumstances in which you might consider burning a U.S. flag?” “Can you imagine any circumstances in which you might consider doing anything with a flag, or an image of a flag, that some people might consider to be ‘desecration’?” and “I feel that it should be a crime to burn the U.S. flag.”
Results
The first research question asked if people differ due to gender in their attitudes regarding how far free speech should be limited in terms of flag burning. There was no significant difference (t=.55,df=41,p=.59) (Male M=13.23,SD=2.74;Female M=12.81,SD=2.21).
The second research question asked if people differ due to race in their attitudes regarding the same issue. This research question was thrown out because 88 percent of the respondents were white, which skewed the results for this question.
The third research question asked if people differ due to military connection in their attitudes regarding the same issue. There was no significant difference (t=-1.69,df=41,p=.10) (Military M=12.1,SD=2.6;Non-Military M=13.4,SD=2.34).
The fourth research question asked if people differ due to religious affiliation in their attitudes regarding the same issue. There was a significant difference here (t=2.96,df=12,p<.05) (Christian M=15.4,SD=2.3;Non-Christian M=11.67,SD=2.24). Christians were likely to have more conservative attitudes, reacting more negatively to the idea of burning a flag, while non-Christians were likely to have more liberal attitudes, reacting more positively to the idea of burning a flag.
The next section reports on the results from the chi-square statistics run on the individual non-Likert-type survey questions.
A chi-square was run on the question which asked: “Which is more important to you, the fact that someone has burned a U.S. flag, or the reasons that someone has resorted to such a form of protest?” Eleven percent of the respondents answered fact, 65 percent answered reasons, seven percent answered neither, and 16 percent answered both. There were no gender differences (X2=.65,df=3,p=.88), or religious affiliation differences (X2=35.14,df=27,p=.14). However, there was a significant difference for military connection (X2=8.19,df=3,p<.05). People with no connection to the military overwhelmingly were more likely to answer reasons (73%), while those respondents with a military connection were likely to answer both (38%).
Another chi-square was run on the question which tested whether or not the respondent knew that the officially prescribed way to dispose of worn and soiled U.S. flags is burning. Thirty-nine percent of the respondents answered correctly with true, while 61 percent answered false. There were no differences for gender (X2=.66,df=1,p=.42), religious affiliation (X2=8.73,df=9,p=.46), or military connection (X2=1.6,df=1,p=.21).
A third chi-square was run on the question that asked: “If you learn that a flag has been burned, are you more likely to be repulsed or curious about the motives or intended message of the flag burner?” Eleven percent of the respondents answered repulsed; 62 percent answered curious; seven percent answered neither; and 19 percent answered both. There were no differences due to gender (X2=.55,df=3,p=.91), religious affiliation (X2=31.2,df=27,p=.26), or military connection (X2=2.54,df=3,p=.47).
Discussion and Limitations
It was interesting to note that no differences existed due to gender. Before the study was conducted, the researcher expected a significant difference to exist in attitudes toward flag burning due to military connection. This was not the case.
While there was not a difference in the major concept tapping attitudes toward flag burning, there was a difference in the individual question which asked: “Which is more important to you, the fact that someone has burned a U.S. flag, or the reasons that someone has resorted to such a form of protest?” The results seem to indicate that those who have no connection to the military are more interested in why someone burns a flag, while those who do have a military connection are more likely to end their interest once they know that the act has occurred.
It was a surprise to find the only significant difference for the major concept tapping attitudes toward flag burning existed due to religious affiliation. The results seem to indicate that the attitudes of members toward the issue of flag burning are influenced by either Christian or non-Christian religious subcultures.
The limitations of this study include possible imperfections in the sample chosen and the choice of questions on the survey. The sample was not random and was limited to students who were almost all between the ages of 18 and 23. This did not allow for a research question to be asked dealing with differences in age. Also, the fact that too many of the respondents were white limits the scope of the study to find a difference due to race. The questionnaire could have included more Likert-type questions tapping the concept of flag burning so as to get a better overall component.
Future research might be interested in exploring the differences in the attitudes of people across a broader range of demographic variables, along with whether or not information regarding the reverent disposal of the flag or education on free speech issues has an effect on the attitudes of the respondents.
References
Barron, M., & Kimmel, M. (2000). Sexual violence in three pornographic media: Toward a sociological explanation. The Journal of Sex Research, 2, 161-168.
Birsch, D. (1997). Freedom of expression, obscenity, and pornography. Proteus, 2, 8-10.
Blakney, T. (1998). Constitutional law - first amendment right of free speech - prior restraint of speech and time, place, and manner restrictions. Tennessee Law Review, 4, 1049-1055.
Bogaert, A. F., Woodard, U., & Hafer, C. L. (1999). Intellectual ability and reactions to pornography. The Journal of Sex Research, 3, 283-291.
Childress, S. A. (1991). Reel "rape speech": Violent pornography and the politics of harm. Law & Society Review, 1, 177-181.
Clark, C. A., & Wiederman, M. W. (2000). Gender and reactions to a hypothetical relationship partner's masturbation and use of sexually explicit media. The Journal of Sex Research, 2, 133-141.
Easton, S. M., & Graham, G. (1995). The problem of pornography: Regulation and the right to free speech. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 3, 297-301.
Franks, J. B. (1999). The evaluation of community standards. The Journal of Social Psychology, 2, 253-254.
Jackson, D. (1997). "Pornography" and "obscenity" and the everlasting enigmas they engender. CEA Forum, 2, 1-3.
Larson, D. (1997). Free speech curbs are dangerous. The St. Croix Review, 5, 34-35.
Margulies, M. B. (1995). Free speech: The status of the first amendment. Touro Law Review, 2, 341-345.
Maring, M. M. (1998). "Children should be seen and not heard": Do children shed their right to free speech at the schoolhouse gate? North Dakota Law Review, 4, 679-694.
Ninth circuit: A law's prohibitions against computer-generated child pornography violate the first amendment (2000). The News Media & the Law, 1, 23-24.
Oliver, C. (1995). Defending pornography: Free speech, sex, and the fight for women's rights, by Nadine Strossen. Reason, 11, 63-65.
Pollack, R. F. (1996). Creating the standards of a global community: Regulating pornography on the Internet - an international concern. Temple International and Comparative Law Journal, 2, 467-475.
Pollitt, K. (1999). Prosecuting innocence. The Nation, 20, 10.
Roland, J. (1994). The social contract and constitutional republics. [On-Line]. Available: http://www.constitution.org/soclcont.htm
Rosenberg, R. S. (1993). Free speech, pornography, sexual harassment, and electronic networks. The Information Society, 4 285-332.
Russ-Mohl, S. (1995). Free speech and high standards. Media Studies Journal, 4, 137-146.
Sileo, C. C. (1995). Pornographobia: Feminists go to war. Insight on the News, 9, 6-7.
Stark, C. A. (1998). Pornography, verbal acts, and viewpoint discrimination. Public Affairs Quarterly, 4, 429-437.
Strossen, N. (1996). Hate speech and pornography: Do we have to choose between freedom of speech and equality? Case Western Reserve Law Review, 2, 449-463.
Two studies probe porn as Internet problem (2000). Newsletter on Intellectual Freedom, 1, 10-36.
Wallace, J. D. (1999). Law & justice: Supreme court's rulings threaten free speech. USA Today, 2646, 32-33.
Weinstein, J. (1997). A brief introduction to free speech doctrine. Arizona State Law Journal, 2, 461-488.
Weiss, J. (1999). The repeal of reticence: A history of America's cultural and legal struggles over speech, obscenity, sexual liberation, and modern art. The Journal of American History, 86, 305-306.
Appendix B: Survey
Demographic Information
Gender: Male _____ Female _____
Race: (check the ONE that describes you BEST)
White _____ Oriental _____
Native Amer. _____ Not Listed _____
Black _____ Hispanic _____
Religious Affiliation: (indicate only ONE that describes you BEST)
No Religion _____
Christian _____ (circle specific denomination)
Baptist Methodist Jehovah’s Witness Catholic Church of Christ Other
Non-Christian _____ (circle one)
Judaism Islam Buddhism Hinduism Other
1) I feel like my level of patriotism is:
____ VERY ABOVE AVERAGE
____ SOMEWHAT ABOVE AVERAGE
____ AVERAGE
____ SOMEWHAT BELOW AVERAGE
____ VERY BELOW AVERAGE
2) Please indicate your feelings regarding the following statement: “Burning the U.S. flag is an acceptable form of free speech.”
____ STRONGLY AGREE
____ AGREE
____ NO OPINION
____ DISAGREE
____ STRONGLY DISAGREE
3) Which is more important to you: the fact that someone has burned a U.S. flag, or the reasons that someone has resorted to such a form of protest?
____ FACT ____ REASONS ____ NEITHER ____ BOTH
4) Do you feel that the U.S. is moving towards a government under which people have more freedom of speech?
YES! yes maybe no NO!
5) To my knowledge, the ________ Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects freedom of speech.
6) Would the government be exercising its authority too carelessly if it banned burning the U.S. flag?
YES! yes maybe no NO!
7) Are you or your parent/guardian a member in or veteran of the U.S. military? _____
8) Do you want the government to protect you from seeing or hearing forms of political dissent that are offensive to you?
YES! yes maybe no NO!
9) Please check how you feel about the following statement:
“Speaking out against one’s own government is an acceptable form of free speech.”
____ STRONGLY DISAGREE
____ DISAGREE
____ NO OPINION
____ AGREE
____ STRONGLY AGREE
10) Burning the flag is the officially prescribed way to dispose of worn and soiled U.S. flags.
____ TRUE ____ NOT TRUE
11) Do you think it is healthy for the government to censor forms of public protest that some people find offensive?
____ MOST OF THE TIME ____ SOMETIMES
____ I DON’T KNOW ____ VERY RARELY
____ NEVER
12) If you learn that a flag has been burned, are you more likely to be repulsed or curious about the motives or intended message of the flag burner?
____ REPULSED ____ CURIOUS ____ NEITHER ____ BOTH
13) Can you imagine any circumstances in which you might consider burning a U.S. flag?
NO! no maybe yes YES!
14) Which of these statements about freedom of speech is closest to your personal ideas?
_____ Freedom of speech should be absolute. (There should be no governmental censorship).
_____ It is O.K. for the government to limit freedom of speech whenever it is deemed necessary.
_____ The government should limit free speech sparingly, only when it poses a societal harm.
15) Can you imagine any circumstances in which you might consider doing anything with a flag, or an image of a flag, that some people might consider to be "desecration"?
YES! yes maybe no NO!
16) I feel that it should be a crime to burn the U.S. flag.
____ STRONGLY AGREE
____ AGREE
____ NO OPINION
____ DISAGREE
____ STRONGLY DISAGREE
- I consider my loyalty to the United States to be:
____ VERY ABOVE AVERAGE
____ ABOVE AVERAGE
____ AVERAGE
____ BELOW AVERAGE
____ VERY BELOW AVERAGE
18) I believe that allegiance to one’s country means that one should not protest against his/her nation’s government.
____ STRONGLY AGREE
____ AGREE
____ NO OPINION
____ DISAGREE
____ STRONGLY DISAGREE
